Is this not a cheaper option?

[rajesh_krishnamohan]

Guys,

 

This question may be weird, but I feel logical and is a brain

chewer. So I want some convincing answers as why someone should not

try this option.

 

I have a D70 with 18-70 mm DX lens. The DX lens costs about $400.

 

Does a significant amount of our photography fall under this category?

 

ISO 50 to 400

f/2.8~4.8

35mm-105mm

Shutter speed 15 seconds to 1/2000

4 Megapixel

With white balancing/different modes of metering

 

If all the above comes from a reputed brand for under 300$, How is

SLR better in this area. Especially my D70 supports a minimum of ISO

200 but ISO 50 is certainly way better. So what is the real

difference in the picture quality? Will these camera beat the SLR

picture quality (only in this segment)because it gives you f/2.8 @

ISO 50? I feel that I spent more dollars and still some areas of my

camera are inferior to those taken by my friends who spent lot less

on these point and shoot cameras..

 

Please pitch in your answers....

 

Regards

[elaine_beckwith]

Here is the complete layman's answer:

 

I take a picture with my Nikon Coolpix 4500 (a feature ladden and quality point and shoot) with the popup flash. The highlights are blown, the auto white balance leave things a bit yellow, and if you zoom in for a crop, it is noisey. This is after I coax the autofocus to find the proper subject. Heaven forbid you try to use the little nobs and sticks to "manually" focus.

 

I do the same thing with my friend's D70 (with which I have 10 minutes of experience). The camera quickly focuses (and if it doesn't, I can just turn the focus ring), takes a perfectly exposed, well balanced picture that doesn't look washed out by the flash.

 

I know there are technicals behind all of this. This chip or that set of optics, and the Nikon 4500 is fabulous for a p'n's digicam. But my answer kind of lands on the fact that using all of the 4500 tweekable settings (contrast, white balance, manual shutter speed and apature, compression, ect.) I get a much more "snap shot" looking photo than on Auto with the D70 (that's all I really had time to do with it).

[marshall]

Elaine's right about some of the differences. The problem is that you're focusing only on a few stats. Meaningful ones, to be sure, but nowhere near the whole picture. Also, the D70's sensor is massive compared to the tiny PnS sensor, which generally results in much less noise regardless of ISO. Add in shutter lag, flexibility of the system, viewfinder differences (even if the D70's isn't great, it is better than the PnS), flash control and power, frame rate, buffer, etc., etc., etc. But just start with a much higher quality sensor and you will see a difference in picture quality.

[ravi_swamy]

I suggest you read this:

 

http://kenrockwell.com/tech/2dig.htm

 

It should answer all the questions you have.

[vivek iyer]

For your hypotheticals, wait for the D-200.

 

Vivek.

[elaine_beckwith]

I could've really used that link when a friend of mine e-mailed me with "I don't know whether to get a 5MP Elf or a digital SLR"

 

I spent about 3 pages demonstrating my relative technical ignorance, trying to explain.

[steven_clark]

DSLR's tend to have snsors so large they often have completely useable ISO 1600 modes. This means with say the basic 50mm normal lens you could take portraits indoors handheld without a flash or added sunlight. With your average PnS digicam you're lucky if you don't need the flash if it's so much as slightly overcast if you want a decent quality picture.

[MichaelChang]

Rajesh, I also felt the same as you after my D70 purchase, but as Ken Rockwell's writing suggests, there's really no perfect solution, only the most acceptable compromise. This is the reason I got a SONY 828 to complement the D70. Two cameras offer the best of both worlds, and in the long run, less expensive than fully equipping D70 to replicate the missing functionality offered by the SONY. An example might be the expensive DR-6 right-angle viewfinder - with the SONY, you only need to swivel its body. <br><br>Take a look at this test image:<br>http://www.photo.net/photo/2606318<br><br>Most of my posted shots were from a SONY DSC-F505V, a camera 2 generations prior to the 828, and at least for now, it's uncertain I'll be able to replicate what I've done using the D70.

[EricM]

here's some html code for everyone to make clickable links. just leave it in a word doc on your desktop for easy access

 

<a href="">click here</a>

 

between the two sets of quotes place the url to where you want to link, and if you want to call it something else or include it in a sentence, just type over the 'click here'. make sure you submit in html and not plain text.

[MichaelChang]

Thanks for the reminder, Eric. I must confess laziness took the better of me.

[rajesh_krishnamohan]

Michael,

 

I was really taken by surprise to see the quality of the image that you sent. Do you think it is possible to take the picture with that sharpness using D70? (ISO 64 wow!!)

 

Folks,

 

This thread was certainly not intended to compare DSLR's and P'N'Shoot. Obviously there are numerous other things that are clearly missing in a P'N'S. Just wanted to know why some type of images taken on a P'N'Shoot are much better than the ones taken using a DSLR though we pay quite a lot on these costly gadgets.

 

The story was entirely different in film cameras because, you get to choose the ISO of the film.

 

Regards

[MichaelChang]

Rajesh, one thing that bothers me with the D70 is its auto ISO - it's not displayed while composing a shot. The only way I know how to get a visual confirmation is to shoot in manual mode - choose an aperture, and dial the shutter up to for a high ISO (higher shutter speed = lower light level = higher ISO), or dial it down for a lower ISO (visible in the viewfinder exposure scale). And given the slow kit lens, I find most of my shooting is forced to auto 1600 under low light unless I manual-override . <br><br>There's been much said about the SONY's high noise content at higher ISO, but what's not discussed is the issue of Signal-to-Noise ratio which makes the apparent noise appear lower if given the correct S/N (determined by the photographer by choosing the correct parameters). <br><br>I'm not sure if the same shot can be done with the D70 of equal quality since I had focus-hunting problems when I tried on the same night, but that may be due to lack of familiarity of settings on my part (being the new toy it is). A contributor that makes the image appear so sharp might be its inherent greater DOF common to all small sensor cameras - a desirable feature when shooting with wide open aperture.

[vivek iyer]

Nice shot there Michael. You also give a sort explanation there about the lens making a difference (ofcourse there are othere variables such as small sensor size, may be better nosie reduction protocol in a Sony camera).

 

As with the film SLRs, the DSLRs will only produce as good an image that can be delivered by the lens. I have shot potraits (I am convinced that this zoom is at its best only at around 65mm focal length and nowhere else) with the kit zoom (18-70) that print very sharp at 30x40cm. With other special lenses, I get sharp images exceeding 20x30cm printable (sharpest) quality. The only AF lenses I have used so far are the kit zoom, 105mm f/2 DC Nikkor and hacked off IX-Nikkors. Once you learn to use the camera, it is possible to make very sharp pictures. 20mm f/3.5 AIS Nikkor (52mm thread) yields super sharp images for me with the D70. I almost always use ISO200. If desired, further noise reduction can be done using nikon capture after taking the shot.

 

I will never buy or use the super plastic zooms (28-200, 70-X100, etc). Perhaps, the problem starts there.

 

If one makes pictures using (say, for example) Velvia and a poor quality zoom with a handheld SLR with the mirror flapping and all the vibration contributing to the image degradtion, what kind of an image would result? Keep in mind, the PS cameras have a less vibration prone shutter (electronic or elctro-mechanic). My Minox GT always yields pin sharp pictures (handheld) and the shutter is whisper quiet.

 

Yes, we are beginning to see a trend now of people switching from D70 (I am not aware of what goes on with the Canon ones) to easier PS cameras that produce completely processed ready to web post images.

 

I am not disappointed with my D70 (but for that CRUMMY VIEW FINDER) for what I use it for- Ultraviolet and Macro photography both almost never using any consumer level nikon lenses.

 

Vivek.

[Jerry_]

$999 for the D70; $400 for the DX lens. Great way to save buying film.

 

 

 

 

A solid, used F100 body: $600. (It'll be running smoothly after the D-90 is on the market....) A old, AF 24-50mm f3.3~ Nikkor lens - maybe $200. (and it is really 24mm to 50mm, not 36mm to ....)

[ravi_swamy]

Get your friends to take a picture and stand right next to them and take the exact same picture and compare. Unless you are doing this then there are hundreds of variables for why the cheap digicam pictures are better than your pictures from your D70.

 

The most important part of getting a good picture is the photographer. It has very little to do with the camera. Ansel Adams with a $5 disposable camera could win an award while most of us with a $10,000 camera would turn out mostly crap. Mario Andretti in a pickup truck could beat any of us in Porsche.

 

Experience and knowledge are what make a good photograph, not spending more than your friend on a camera.

 

Read all of the stuff in the "Learn" section of photo.net and ignore the "Equipment" section until you understand the "Learn" section first.

[vivek iyer]

Gerald,

 

Why would you still recommend a SLR camera? Any PS recommendations for film?

 

BTW, because of the smaller sensor size neither the focal length of a lens used nor the magnification it produces at a given distance varies.

 

Thus, the 24-50mm zoom still will be 24-50mm. The maximum magnification from a 200mm f/4 AF (current version) will still be 1:1 (and not 1:1.5).

 

Vivek.

[rajesh_krishnamohan]

Ravi,

<p>

For instance check this one

<br>

Picture 1

<br>

<img src="http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/canong2_samples1/010814-1615-33.jpg"><br>

<br>

Picture 2

<br>

<img src="http://img.dpreview.com/gallery/nikond70_samples/dsc_0063.jpg"><br>

 

<br>

 

These 2 are almost similar and you will not know the difference when you print them. Picture 2 is a little bit zoomed in. Other than that, I do not see any difference in the quality of the picture.

 

<br>

 

Ravi, I guess you assumed that I would have made a mistake while shooting my DSLR and hence I feel it crapy. But the above images were not taken by me. So chances of your doubts (that I know nothing about photograpy), if any should be reduced now :-).

 

<br>

 

Thank you

[MichaelChang]

Vivek, I own both the D70 and 828 for reasons I've explained - to have the best of both worlds, especially when the strengths of one compensates for the weaknesses of the other. <br><br>I see photography as an exercise of doing the best with what you have rather than the fruitless search for the best gear. Any camera/lens combination that gets the shot for me is a good camera. I don't discriminate, and I won't readily blame the camera for my poor photography unless the gear is indeed limiting for which there is no workaround.

[vivek iyer]

Michael,

 

Thanks, I guess I already knew your purpose. The question posed was related to the discussion (whatever that topic is!).

 

Ravi,

 

I am sure Andretti always will win mega awards with a $5 disposable camera and A.Adams did know how to drive his van. Both had the best of the tools at their disposal to achieve what they were good at. No cheapos. Complete myths! If in doubt, read up.

 

Vivek.

[richard_oleson]

My only digital is a Nikon Coolpix 3100. Neat little camera, the 3MP is enough for anything I use digital for, and I like the 1.6" minimum focus.... but the AF system in the thing absolutely sucks. It completely refuses to focus on a close object if there is a more distant target anywhere in the field of view, and while you can focus on the back of your hand and lock the focus setting and recompose, you're then left with a one-inch LCD screen to try to guess whether the subject is in focus. Only an SLR viewfinder (or a highly magnified electronic finder) can confirm for you the quality of the image you're going to get. If I was committed to digital, I'd invest the money fora good SLR; if I wanted to save money I'd invest much less in a good film SLR. And good lenses in either case (the little P&S lens is a textbook on distortion).

 

:)=